Third/fifth/ninth note tempo!? What the?

[venik]

So I've been playing for about 15 years, but my third notes are ALWAYS sloppy. Especially when offset with quarter/eighth notes...or worse other sixth/fifth notes.

So I've tried different ways, thinking in both terms of the third and the eighth at the same time. And breaking the third note up into 1-2s and playing the eighth on the 2.

How else would you count it? What do the pros do?

In arabesque #1 for example I do

1-2-1-2-1-2-1-2-1-2-1-2-1
B-0-R-L-R-0-B-0-R-L-R-0-B

B = both hands
R = Right hand
L = Left hand
0 = silent

It KIND of works, I struggle. But I just stare like a deer in headlights at those 6th over 5th note measures.

Suggestions/help? please!

[birba]

What ARE you talking about?! 

[sucom]

Hi there

Your post is a tad confusing so I'm not sure if I am answering your query here, but the first thing that came to my mind was the difficulty of playing two's against three's in Debussy's 1st arabesque and similar situations.

If your question is about this then I would say that the slower you try to put the two hands together, the slightly more difficult it becomes.   One way around this is to learn the notes of each hand separately until they become fluent and secure and then play through, first focussing on listening to the right hand to ensure it is smooth, and then focussing on the left hand.  

With the 1st Arabesque, the difficulty is keeping the quavers smooth and even in the left hand.  If you focus on them while playing, it should help.  

Whenever you are matching up 5's against 3's or 9's against 4's or whatever, the easiest way is to focus on each hand while playing, ensuring you can hear them being played smoothly, rather than trying to work out the maths.

If this post isn't what you meant in your question, just ignore it!

[venik]

No that's exactly what I meant.

What are the way(s) of playing nines vs fives vs threes etc.

I guess there are two types of thirds, which is confusing. Tempo and harmonic. I'm talking about tempo. They also use relatively the same numbers which is also confusing hah.

Thanks, and I'll try that. And if anyone has any other suggestions or perspectives to suggest, I would be greatly appreciative.

[lostinidlewonder]

Venik means triplet not thirds.

Syncopation gets difficult if we look at it note by note because it is a hand independence issue. I have always used my ear to control syncopation, you have an understanding of what the sound should be like and the hand reacts according to this and the associated muscular memory (I tend to feel it as elastic in the way you can really overdo and elongate it more so than when you are not syncopating).

You can always break up the syncopated pattern into manageable repetitive pattern chunks but never note by note. You can highlight this point by considering simply two notes:
CDCDCDCDC  vs  CDC DCD CDC. If you consider these note by note they both look and feel the same, but considering them in these groups encourage and understanding of direction and an oscillating change. You can notice these type of inversions even when you do different notes in actual pieces, this helps you to absorb syncopation more naturally.

[ted]

I am not primarily a classical performer but rhythm is a very vital part of my own music. I think lostinidlewonder is correct in that if you develop the ability to actually feel independent, simultaneous rhythms then you have cracked the general problem. Counting and other devices only provide expedient special solutions to special situations. A lot depends on whether any of the rhythms have aligned notes and whether the precise juxtaposed rhythms are vital to the music. Often things like five against six are just groups of regularly spaced notes which the composer has notated that way by convention. In other words the precise rhythmic feel of five against six is not intrinsic to the required sound and in any case, each stream of notes is quite regular.

The real difficulty arises when both these conditions are false, i.e. the juxtaposed rhythmic feeling is vital and the notes are not evenly spaced, even perhaps wholly unaligned. A very simple example of this is the little section of eight bars in Db in the Rhapsody In Blue (page 18 in my copy), where one of the main themes, itself containing syncopation and triplets, is played over a sort of inverted stride bass. There are three ways of aligning it and Gershwin uses two in succession - very effective in fact. When I learned this piece with my teacher many years ago I tried counting various ways and, as he rightly pointed out with much laughter, the whole thing started sounding like Gilbert and Sullivan gone wrong (6/8) which isn't the intended effect at all. He insisted I work until I could feel left and right hand rhythms at once at a reasonably slow tempo. I think that was my first time to do that, and it took me ages. However, with time, the general knack can be acquired and applied to any new situation.

[venik]

I am not primarily a classical performer but rhythm is a very vital part of my own music. I think lostinidlewonder is correct in that if you develop the ability to actually feel independent, simultaneous rhythms then you have cracked the general problem. Counting and other devices only provide expedient special solutions to special situations. A lot depends on whether any of the rhythms have aligned notes and whether the precise juxtaposed rhythms are vital to the music. Often things like five against six are just groups of regularly spaced notes which the composer has notated that way by convention. In other words the precise rhythmic feel of five against six is not intrinsic to the required sound and in any case, each stream of notes is quite regular.

The real difficulty arises when both these conditions are false, i.e. the juxtaposed rhythmic feeling is vital and the notes are not evenly spaced, even perhaps wholly unaligned. A very simple example of this is the little section of eight bars in Db in the Rhapsody In Blue (page 18 in my copy), where one of the main themes, itself containing syncopation and triplets, is played over a sort of inverted stride bass. There are three ways of aligning it and Gershwin uses two in succession - very effective in fact. When I learned this piece with my teacher many years ago I tried counting various ways and, as he rightly pointed out with much laughter, the whole thing started sounding like Gilbert and Sullivan gone wrong (6/8) which isn't the intended effect at all. He insisted I work until I could feel left and right hand rhythms at once at a reasonably slow tempo. I think that was my first time to do that, and it took me ages. However, with time, the general knack can be acquired and applied to any new situation.

Thanks that's what I've been trying to do lately. I have arabesque 2 memorized as of about a few days ago, after counting and counting and trying wierd counts like 1a2a1, i've thrown it all out decided to learn what seems insurmountable. Counting two tempos at the same time. I feel like all my piano playing life I've tried to avoid learning this subconciously, but it feels much more fluid the better I get at it.

I started learning Liszt's un sospiro yesterday and thats when it clicked that I had to learn to do two tempos and really threw in the towel. 7s over triplets and quarter notes... If I were to count that I would be splitting the 7s into 2 1/3s anyways. Essentially counting two rhythms regardless.

I checked this thread and you bolstered that uncomfortable change in playstyle, thanks.

[becky8898]

Hi Venik. What I have noticed is that most people dont seem to learn there seperate hand parts well enough before they try putting the different rhythms together.  Practice makes perfect or something like that.

Cheers, Becky

[venik]

Hi Venik. What I have noticed is that most people dont seem to learn there seperate hand parts well enough before they try putting the different rhythms together.  Practice makes perfect or something like that.

Cheers, Becky

Thanks, its been years since I learned hands separately, but i'll try it again maybe.